Caste-based reservation is not tenable

The Supreme Court’s recent judgement to uphold reservation of seats in educational institutions for OBCs (“Other Backward Classes”) has understandably stirred the pot. Opinions and arguments from both camps have been coming thick and fast, whether in private conversations or through the media. There is jubilation in one side, despondency on the other. I do not have anything against the need for some kind of affirmative action to ensure that a level playing field is created for the under-privileged millions in our country. However, where I do have a problem is the manner in which every government in the past 30 years or so has been trying to convert this important socio-economic issue into an issue of vote-bank politics.

So what are my reservations (pun intended) about the reservation policy? The underlying premise of the philosophy of reservation is that all members of the “backward classes” are disdavantaged, while all members of “forward castes” are deemed to be good enough to get admission under ther own steam. I do not think this is a valid assumption; neither is it fair. Economic considerations cannot be ignored in arriving at who needs extra care in our society.

1. A policy of reservation – especially in institutions of higher education- per se does nothing to promote access to primary education. Millions of children will still be denied access to even basic schooling- and it is this lack of primary schooling that often denies acces to future education and employment oportunities.
2. Reservation should explicitly include economic criteria. In my view, a rich person (irrespective of caste) can access and afford education for his/her children and does not need the protection offered by the reservation policy. It is the poor who need such protection- again, irrespective of their caste.
3. Does this policy not reinforce and ecnourage corruption? Rather than study and work hard, it will be tempting for people to spend a few thousands of Rupees on procuring a certificate that states that they are an OBC (or SC/ST for that matter). Again, those that have the money for this will benefit; genuine OBC aspirants without the financial resources will be denied.
4. Where does one draw the line on “reservation”? Why the furore when Raj Thackeray’s MNS is asking for 80% reservation of private sector jobs in Maharashtra for sons and daughters of the soil? And what gets precedence- son of the soil or caste? And how do you categorize someone that is a second-generation son or daughter of the soil?
5. Extending the above point, what happens when the products of a reservation policy enter the job market? Performance evaluation/management is part of every company’s HR mandate. Should there be reservation based on irrelevant, non-performance criteria such as caste? Should it be mandatory for 20% or 30% of the top-performers in any company to be determined based on caste? When the world is moving to ensure equal opportunity by legislating against discrimination on the basis of age, colour, creed, religion, gender, sexual preference and so on, why should we in India promote a culture of discrimination? And what will such policies do to our country’s overall competitiveness- say in a knowledge intensive industry such as IT, consulting or financial services? Should a client have to accept lower standards just because the work was done by someone who got the degre and hence job because of a certificate stating that s/he is of a certain caste, and not because s/he was the best the company could hire? Will you trust a doctor or lawyer if you knew that s/he got her/his degree simply because of her/his caste? This is not to say that everyone who benefits from the reservation system is not competent- but the odds are higher that someone using the policy will have it easier than someone who cannot. And that can cause distortions in professional competency and skills that in turn, can impact our society at large.

As I said before, I am all for leveling the palying field. My recommendation is to make primary education free for the econmically weaker sections of society, independent of caste. Those that come from economically backward sections of society (irrespective of “caste”) should be given additional facilities such as healthy food/nutrition, free books, extra coaching, access to extra-curricular opportunities and so on. Let there be a common “public” examination at the end of 10 years of schooling- and let those that qualify be awarded scholarships for higher education- again, only if they come from economically weak families. Rather than quibble about what constitutes the “creamy layer” and how it is to be defined, give everyone a chance.And may the best boys and girls, men and women be given opportunities commensurate with their performance in an otherwise level playing field. Otherwise, I fear that the much-hyped “India story” will only remain a pipe dream. Worse, a real opportunity for sustainable progress will have been squandered, nay sacrificed, at the altar of political convenience.

There will be many who will quote the case of Tamil Nadu with its ridiculously high % of reserved seats as an shining example of why the policy works. But look at the number of migrants from that state to other parts of the country/world just to pursue education. It is because of such policies that other states are now feeling the pinch and demanding reservation for sons and daughters of the soil. And while there is no official statistic, it would be an interesting study to find out how many thousands of bright students from Tamil Nadu have been denied the opportunity to pursue the field of their choice just because of pernicious policy.

Admittedly, the underlying problem of social oppression and inhuman denial of human rights is very real. It is a slur on our country and a solution must be found to redress those that have suffered. But if 50 years after such policies were first introduced, there is still huge disparity and the need is felt to perpetuate the policy, clearly something is wrong- or has not worked the way it was supposed to. Any which way, it’s time for a change.